Skip to main content
Glama
tonysheesh

MCP-Shield Pro

by tonysheesh
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Related Servers

Alternatives to MCP-Shield Pro

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • hachiman

      nidhish28guhan-netizen
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents and MCP servers to operate under autonomous security enforcement, including pre-deployment scanning, per-call authorization, runtime monitoring, incident containment, and comprehensive auditing.
      1
      MIT

    • MCP Shield Runtime

      samsgates
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      MCP Shield Runtime is a local-first security gateway that controls MCP tool calls with parameter-level policies, approval gates, secret redaction, rate limiting, contract drift detection, and tamper-evident auditing before they reach the upstream MCP server.
      1
      Apache 2.0

    • SentinelMCP

      ateeqdesktop-dot
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enforces deterministic security policies as an inline firewall for MCP server tool calls, with AST-based validation, cryptographic audit logging, and CLI-based evaluation and verification.
      MIT

    • mcp-security-scanner

      badchars
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      Security scanning for MCP servers from the inside out. Provides runtime inspection, AST-based static analysis, config audit, dependency analysis, and OWASP MCP Top 10 compliance in a single MCP server.
      55
      87
      5
      MIT
    Deploy Server
    RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

    TDQS

    A3.5/5.0

    Scored across 3 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool serves a clearly distinct purpose: mcp_scan audits for vulnerabilities, generate_aibom produces a supply chain document, and mcp_verify checks cryptographic signatures. There is no overlap or ambiguity between these operations.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    All tool names use an imperative verb followed by an object (scan, generate, verify), but the prefixes are inconsistent: two use 'mcp_' and one uses 'generate_'. This is a minor deviation from a fully uniform naming pattern.

    Tool Count5/5

    With exactly 3 tools, the server is tightly scoped to its purpose of MCP security assurance. Each tool covers a distinct, valuable function without bloat or excessive overlap.

    Completeness4/5

    The set covers the core security lifecycle: vulnerability scanning, supply chain artifact generation, and request verification. A possible gap is a remediation or compliance-check tool, but for a focused security utility, the surface is quite complete.

    Maintenance

    ActivitySlowing
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources